Caution: Vague Spoilers AheadI don't really think that I can do this book justice in my review. I thought that it was brilliant. I know that I have seen the movie long ago, and remember the big reveal at the end and Charlton yelling about damning everyone all to hell, but I don't remember much more than that. I'll have to watch the movie again.I really loved the subtle cautionary tale running throughout the story. Maybe it's just my feminist liberal bleeding heart whispering to me, but I feel that Boulle just plain hated live-animal experiments and was determined to show people that the tables could be turned one day. Easily. But more than that, the book cautions us not to be complacent and lazy about our place in life and in the food chain and to keep striving and learning and bettering ourselves, but NOT at the cost of other life-forms. We're on top now, but only time will tell if we stay there. And do we actually deserve to be? We, the "Lords of Creation," seem to think that we can do anything and everything we want to do. We're so filled with pride that we never think that OUR civilization could fall. Those kind of things are for history books, not real life. Yet we consume resources like they're going out of style, and pollute the earth like we have a spare, and just generally act like there's a "Reset" button somewhere that we can just press when we've reached the point of no return. Why shouldn't another species give running things a try? If they can do it better... But that's the thing. They imitate us, so WOULD they do it better? At one point in the story, when Merou was being shown the experiments, I thought to myself, "They are proud of the fact that they are keeping the "animals" down... Taking any vestiges of humanity or rational thought away as soon as it is displayed in order to protect themselves. They are so fearful of the possibility of human uprising that they commit atrocities to prevent them." And then I thought to myself, "Oh, snap! So do we." We can justify anything. And so can Apes, who apparently learned from the best. In examining the Apes, we're looking at ourselves. Can we really pass judgment?But, I was happy to see that the three "races" of Apes could cohabitate and cooperate in peace, which is more than we've accomplished so far. Our differences divide us, but the Apes recognize and relish their differences and use them well. But Apes still seem to rival Man in the fear department: the unknown is scary, so just destroy it and move on.I do have to say that I was kind of annoyed with Merou's assumption that life forms in a far, far away galaxy would automatically be human to be intelligent. It just goes to show that our pride will be our downfall. But it reminded me of a quote from another science-fiction book that I enjoyed, Solaris by Stanislaw Lem (which you should remember if you keep up with my reviews):"...We take off into the cosmos, ready for anything: for solitude, for hardship, for exhaustion, death. Modesty forbids us to say so, but there are times when we think pretty well of ourselves. And yet, if we examine it more closely, our enthusiasm turns out to be all sham. We don't want to conquer the cosmos, we simply want to extend the boundaries of Earth to the frontiers of the cosmos. For us, such and such a planet is as arid as the Sahara, another as frozen as the North Pole, yet another as lush as the Amazon basin. We are humanitarian and chivalrous; we don't want to enslave other races, we simply want to bequeath them our values and take over their heritage in exchange. We think of ourselves as the Knights of the Holy Contact. This is another lie. We are only seeking Man. We have no need of other worlds. We need mirrors. We don't know what to do with other worlds. [...:] We arrive here as we are in reality, and when the page is turned and that reality is revealed to us--that part of our reality which we would prefer to pass over in silence--then we don't like it anymore." Oh, it's so apt. We inherently assume that anyone of any worth or intelligence will be just like us. Even the "Little Green Men" type aliens that pop up in the Weekly World News magazines are still modeled after humans, and hell, they are nicknamed "men"! I just hope that one day we'll be able to see the bigger picture.I do want to mention two things that I wish were clarified a little more in the book. I'd been told that the twist in the book was different than the twist in the movie. I had had a theory that somehow during the journey from Earth, something got mixed up and the planet they landed on WAS Earth, only far in the future. Since it seems that was not correct, I'm confused as to how two planets so distant actually would be so very similar. The two main races (Apes and humans) are the same genetically (or so it seems as Merou was able to successfully mate with an "alien" human), and there are several other animals that are similar. Not to mention the society and transportation etc. It just seems so unlikely that Soror would be so similar to Earth without knowing of its existence. And speaking of which, that brings me to the second thing. Merou named the planet Soror prior to meeting any sentient beings. Didn't they have their own name for the planet? I cannot believe that throughout ANY of the discussions they had regarding the origins of their species, or space travel, or anything, that they did not once say, "Oh, and by the way, we call our planet Apex." (Haha, get it?) But really, that point bothered me in the story. Anyway, Aside from those two points, I thought that this was a really great book. I hope that everyone gets a chance to read it one day.
Je n’avais pas plus de dix ans quand j’ai lu mon dernier livre de science fiction, Niourk, de Stefen Wul, une histoire post apocalyptique en Amérique du nord. Et puis plus rien, depuis vingt-cinq ans, par manque d’intérêt, jusqu’à cette Planète des Singes, sur une suggestion d'une camarade de goodreads. L’auteur, Pierre Boulle(1912-1994), est un français qui a passé une partie de sa jeunesse en Asie, et s’est battu contre l’armée impériale japonaise lors de la dernière guerre, avant de se faire emprisonner par les forces françaises d’alors, expérience qui lui a inspiré Le pont de la rivière Kwaï, un autre de ses romans, également adapté au cinéma. J’ai revu après cette lecture les deux versions cinématographiques, pour vérifier qu’elles étaient bien infidèles au roman original, qui est bien plus fourni est ambiguë que les films. Et j’ai plutôt été satisfait de cette lecture.Parmi les éléments qui m’ont plu, ce sont toutes les inspirations tirées de la littérature des anciens. Le narrateur s’appelle Ulysse, et son voyage s’apparente à une Odyssée, avec des péripéties fantastiques, horribles, absurdes et inquiétantes, tout comme celles du héros d’Homère. Le caractère des deux personnages présente également des similitudes, une certaine finesse qui s’étend à la duplicité, une langue bien pendue, un positionnement moral ambivalent, une volonté de survivre par tous les moyens, les passages du transports à l'abattement. Également, dans ce livre, on retrouve ce caractère brutal, réel et insensé de la violence, tout comme cet érotisme sans freins, ni fards ni manières prompt à faire crier la délicatesse contemporaine, le même qui s'étale dans les romans grecs(Les Ethiopiques,Le Roman De Leucippé Et Clitophon,Les Éphésiaques, ou le roman d'Habrocomès et d'Anthia,Le Roman de Chaireas et Callirhoé), et chez Apulée(Les Métamorphoses ou l'Âne d'or). Mais l’humour et la satire ne sont pas absents: utiliser les animaux pour instruire les hommes, n'est ce pas le ressort des fables d’Ésope et de Phèdre? On sent aussi là toute l’influence (peut-être indirecte) du grand Lucien de Samosate. Comment ne pas songer à son histoire véritable, délicieux pastiche d’Homère, et à ses truculentes railleries des philosophes et pseudo-autoritées établies dans ses nombreux dialogues (Portraits de philosophes,Comédies humaines) ? Enfin, les réflexions sur l’âme des animaux m’ont fait très vivement penser à ce magnifique texte de Plutarque, l’intelligence des animaux, l'une des meilleures de ses oeuvres morales. Aussi, tous les souvenirs de ces agréables lectures me sont venus à la lecture de ce roman qui respire l’antiquité. C'était également plaisant de voir évoquer les paradoxes de La Relativité.Quant à l’histoire, elle s’apparente par l’esprit sceptique et antimoralisateur à celles de Rabelais et son Pantagruel, de Swift et ses Voyages de Gulliver, à Voltaire et son Micromégas; il s’agit de changer les points de vue. Je pense que cette histoire a suffisamment de potentiel pour se prêter à toutes sortes d’interprétations divergentes. Pour moi, de par ce ton nettement anticlérical, je n'ai pu me défendre de songer à l'épisode noachique de la Genèse(Ch.9): Dieu bénit Noé et ses fils et leur dit « Soyez féconds, multipliez et remplissez la terre.Vous serez craints et redoutés de toute bête de la terre, de tout oiseau du ciel, de tout ce qui se meut sur la terre et de tous les poissons de la mer ils sont livrés entre vos, mains.Tout ce qui se meut et qui a vie vous servira de nourriture ; je vous donne tout cela, comme je vous avais donné l’herbe verte.Seulement vous ne mangerez point de chair avec son âme, c’est-à-dire avec son sang.Et votre sang à vous, j’en demanderai compte à cause de vos âmes, j’en demanderai compte à toute bête ; de la main de l’homme, de la main de l’homme qui est son frère, je redemanderai l’âme de l’homme.Quiconque aura versé le sang de l’homme, par l’homme son sang sera versé, car Dieu a fait l’homme à son image.Vous, soyez féconds et multipliez ; répandez-vous sur la terre et vous y multipliez. »Pierre Boule n’est peut-être pas un grand poète, mais il a fait une œuvre propre à stimuler l’imagination et captiver les sens, c’est une distraction agréable, mais certaines rudesses qu’il contient froisseront peut-être les âmes plus délicates et les plus sensibles.
What do You think about Planet Of The Apes (2001)?
.رواية كابوسية، مخيفة، من روائع أدب الخيال العلمي، تطرح مأساة الجنس البشري، تنقلب الحياة ، ويُصبح القرد هو السيد وعبيده من البشر،نتيجة أخطاء الإنسان وحده، الرواية تطرح سؤال ..ماذا لو ان القرد هو الذي تطور وجعلته الطفرات الكائن الذكي والوحيد على كوكب الأرض ؟ والانسان تخلف في تطوره فهو في الرواية غير قابل على التكلم والتواصل باللغة او حتى الاشارات، كوكوب القردة رواية الفرنسي بيبير يوليه اول من وضع الحجر الأساس او الثورة الأفلام المقتبسة عبر تاريخ هوليود، الفِلم الاول "كوكب القردة" انتج عام 1968 من اخراج فرانكلين ج،شافر وبطولة تشارلتون هيستن كان بمثابة ثورة في المكياج المطاطية وتحصل الفنان جون شامبيوز جائزة اوسكارالرواية تحكى عن رحلة علمية تتكون من ثلاثة اشخاص وهم عالم فضاء مرموق، صحفي ، والطبيب ، يشرع الرجال الثلاثة لرحلة لمنكب الجوزاء، مجرة بعيدة عن كوكب الارض للبحث عن كوكب شبيه بالارض تماما، فيها كل شيء…لكن الغريب ان القردة هي التى تحكم الكوكب أما البشر حيوان غير ناطق. وتبدأ الأحداث والمغامرات والقصص الممتعة ثم تنتهي بهروب الصحفي ميرو مع زوجته وابنه في رحلة للعودة الى كوكب الارض ولكن ….هناك تكمن المفاجاةأعجبني الحديث المتواضع عن سُلم التطور أو الدارونية في الرواية، يبقى الانسان مغرور لأنه صاحب العقل الوحيد،،مع أنه ما كان خيال علمي اليوم يُصبح حقيقة غدا وهذا شيء واضح…ماذا لو تطور دولفين كمثال وأصبح السيد، رواية ذكية جداًشاهدت فِلم الجديد "فجر كوكب القرود" اخراج مات ريييف وهو الجزء المكمل لفلمه الاول "ثورة كوكب القردة " …الفلم مقتبس من نفس الرواية لكن بشكل ثاني …هو ثورة القردة على البشر بسبب انفلونزا او عقار طبي ، الفلم مدهش جدا من ناحية التقنيات والتصوير ومشاعر التمثلية للقردة..
—Tariq Alferis
An astronaut --- a Frenchman named Ulysse Merou, it turns out, not Charleton Heston --- is marooned on a planet where the humans are mute animals, and the apes have evolved into a sentient and verbal race. Ulysse’s appearance, of course, threatens to overturn the conservative, orangutan-dictated dogmatic order of things: what secret origins lie buried in the past of this planet? Well, it’s not quite the classic film’s twist ending, but as I now see, the remake was fairly faithful to the original source material.This is a very interesting book, not what I expected. Boulle makes no attempt to emulate any kind of “realistic” science fiction: this is social allegory in its purest form. Ulysses’ adventures are pure Swiftian satire; the apes are people, down to their Earth-style dress, cars, and airplanes. And despite its modern publication date, the novel deals with very 19th-century concerns such as evolution, the frontiers of science, the ethical responsibilities of the preeminent species, and the freedom of thought; for this, and for its rudimentary approach to the “alien” world, the book could easily have been written by H.G. Wells. Which is a good thing, of course. This is superb social satire, very funny and cutting stuff, as apposite today as it must have been in the ‘60s. And I liked that second twist ending.
—Ensiform
Does it make sense to say that Planet Of The Apes is an inherently sexist book because Nova ( the sexual companion of the novel's protagonist Ulysse) is depicted as mute, dumb and naked? Okay her character is, but so is every other human character in the novel. That's the point: it's a Dystopia, where Humans and Apes have essentially switched roles. The humans are dumb, naked, mute - both men and women. I really don't see how that can qualify it to been shunned as an "repulsive sexist book".
—Tiffany
